In previous posts, we explored the pros and cons of commercial off the shelf (COTS) and semi-custom development. That said, for maximum design freedom, limited only by the laws of physics, fully custom development is the way to go.
A fully custom design starts from “first principles”, that is a description of the problem in physics or mathematical terms, and designs a solution at a very detailed level. For example, at Fitbit, as pioneers of wearable heart rate tracking technology, we needed to understand physical, electrical, and biological properties of the system to design a custom mechanical, optical, electrical and software system to accurately measure a person’s heart rate for many days on a battery charge.
Fully custom design can be much more expensive, have a long time to market, and higher supply chain and technical risk compared to the other options. We would also encounter a high non-recurring engineering (NRE), which at low quantities can be a roadblock. However, the benefits of fully custom design can be priceless, as often this results in completely unique and differentiable IP that is highly competitive. For instance, at Fitbit I co-invented three different patents on PPG sensing architectures. In fully custom design, we also have complete design freedom to make the product vision come true, given enough time and budget to execute it.
Often, a good thought exercise is to start from “first-principles” and imagine what a fully custom design would look like with no limitations. Then, we can look on the market for any COTS components that would satisfy some or part of the design and consider the impacts of switching them out, such as reduced cost & schedule. Ultimately, this can lead to having the benefits of a semi-custom solution while retaining the capabilities and flexibility of the fully custom design. That’s it for this discussion, follow me for more upcoming insights, and DM me if you have a specific problem you’re dealing with. Thanks!